[openstack-dev] Nova scheduler 3rd-party (custom) driver connection in Newton

Hello! Before Newton release, I just used full module path in nova.conf to plugin. But now blueprints suggest to use built-in drivers via entry points from `nova.scheduler` namespace. **How I should plug 3rd-party, not built-in drivers?** I actually tried to add entry points manually to

[openstack-dev] [kolla] Please add kolla-kubernetes to your watched prjoects

Kollagues, The reviews on kolla-kubernetes are going slowly. I suspect the reason is folks don’t have kolla-kubernetes enabled in their watched projects list. If you need instruction on how to do that, please contact me on IRC. We need to work as a team to get the kolla-kubernetes backed-up

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] [telemetry] [requirements] [FFE] Oslo.db 4.13.2

On 09/07/2016 07:44 PM, Joshua Harlow wrote: > >> >> Gnocchi is a service. It's not in the pip requirements list for >> ceilometer, so releasing a new version of oslo.db and having that >> trigger a new release of gnocchi won't also trigger a new release >> of ceilometer to update its dependency

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone][oslo][release][requirements][FFE] global-requirements update to positional to 1.1.1

On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 08:10:45AM -0500, Matthew Thode wrote: > https://review.openstack.org/366631 > > The combination of oslo.context 2.9.0 + positional 1.0.1 (which is the > current minimum requirement) results in various unit test failures in > barbican, related to parsing of request headers

[openstack-dev] [vote][kolla] Core Nomination for Christian Berendt (berendt on irc)

Kolla core reviewer team, It is my pleasure to nominate Christian Berendt for the Kolla core team. Christian’s output over the last cycle has been fantastic – cracking the top 10 reviewer list for the full cycle. His 30 day stats [1] place him in solid 7th position, and considering the size

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements][FFE] Request to allow os-vif 1.2.1 in upper-constraints for newton

On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 02:10:55PM -0500, Matt Riedemann wrote: > This is the FFE to get this change in for newton: > > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/365165/ > > The os-vif 1.2.1 release was a bug fix patch release to get a high priority > bug [1] in for newton that is impacting the neutron

Re: [openstack-dev] [tricircle] your proposal for the name of networking and gateway sub-projects

For oral interpretation, Trio2o could be "Try OpenStack api gateway to OpenStack for large scale and/or distributed cloud", but for formal interpretation, how about "Trio2o is to provide APIs gateway for multiple OpenStack clouds to act as a single OpenStack cloud". And for Tricircle,

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] [telemetry] [requirements] [FFE] Oslo.db 4.13.2

On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 01:29:35PM -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: > What do we have that uses oslo.db and is itself a library that would > need to be re-released? Package : oslo-db [oslo-db>=4.10.0] (used by 40 projects) Re-Release : 1 projects openstack/neutron-lib

Re: [openstack-dev] [puppet] Puppet 4 related backports

On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 4:27 PM, Cody Herriges wrote: > For an ongoing project here at Puppet I needed to validate the stable/mitaka > branches against Puppet 4. I've done that for all three scenarios but doing > so required a few backports of items currently in master. > >

[openstack-dev] [interop][defcore][ptl] Intro to creating next Interop (DefCore) guideline

BEGIN:VCALENDAR METHOD:REQUEST PRODID:Microsoft Exchange Server 2010 VERSION:2.0 BEGIN:VTIMEZONE TZID:Central Standard Time BEGIN:STANDARD DTSTART:16010101T02 TZOFFSETFROM:-0500 TZOFFSETTO:-0600 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=1SU;BYMONTH=11 END:STANDARD BEGIN:DAYLIGHT

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Getting rid of ISO

Congratuations. any plan to have fuel docker image? From: Oleg Gelbukh [mailto:ogelb...@mirantis.com] Sent: Thursday, September 8, 2016 4:28 AM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Getting rid of

Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon][OSC][Nova][Neutron] Launch instance with Floating IP

Double api sounds a little terrifying when really there are probably so many different ways you can already solve this using the services we already have. The thing I don't get is Martin's requirement that "an instance must have internet on boot" and that to do that he must have a floating ip

Re: [openstack-dev] [tricircle] your proposal for the name of networking and gateway sub-projects

Hi, Shinobu and team, For Trio2o we can define it more specifically as: Try OpenStack api gateway to OpenStack for large scale cloud: so the meaning in short is trio2o. This is my personal interpretation, how do you think about this interpretation? - And now the

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] [telemetry] [requirements] [FFE] Oslo.db 4.13.2

Gnocchi is a service. It's not in the pip requirements list for ceilometer, so releasing a new version of oslo.db and having that trigger a new release of gnocchi won't also trigger a new release of ceilometer to update its dependency list. The service projects are not yet at their RC1 point,

Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon][OSC][Nova][Neutron] Launch instance with Floating IP

Interesting. It kind of sounds like your proposing a sort of... openstack standard library api api? (yes, double apis) Where you can build up an api using other api calls and users can rely on those standard overarching api's to be there? Thanks, Kevin

Re: [openstack-dev] [keystone] new core reviewer (rderose)

Congratulations Ron. Welcome aboard. On 3 September 2016 at 04:13, Brad Topol wrote: > Shh! Let them get the leg irons welded shut on him first :-). Pay no > attention Ron... Congratulations! > > > Brad Topol, Ph.D. > IBM Distinguished Engineer > OpenStack > (919)

Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon][OSC][Nova][Neutron] Launch instance with Floating IP

On Wed, Sep 7, 2016, at 06:33 PM, Adrian Turjak wrote: > Heat is a bit of overkill for something as tiny as this. I agree. And though it's been a while since I've looked at Heat I didn't get the impression that it was designed for this sort of usage: a simple API call that orchestrates

Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon][OSC][Nova][Neutron] Launch instance with Floating IP

On Wed, Sep 7, 2016, at 06:54 PM, Martin Millnert wrote: > On Thu, 2016-09-08 at 09:34 +1200, Adrian Turjak wrote: > > This is exactly what something like Minstral would be fantastic for. > > Multi-project workflow. > > Rather than try and build logic like this directly into nova, looks > > at

Re: [openstack-dev] [freezer] Core team updates

+1 On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 11:59 PM, Dieterly, Deklan wrote: > +1 > -- > Deklan Dieterly > > Senior Systems Software Engineer > HPE > > > > > On 8/25/16, 9:33 AM, "Mathieu, Pierre-Arthur" > wrote: > > >Hello, > > > >I would like to

[openstack-dev] [fuel-library] Nominate Stanislaw Bogatkin to fuel-library core

Hello, I would like to nominate Stanislaw Bogatkin to fuel-library core due to his significant contribution to the project [1] and [2]. He is one of the top reviewers and contributors in the project. [1] http://stackalytics.com/?user_id=sbogatkin_type=all=all=marks=fuel-library [2]

[openstack-dev] [fuel-virtualbox] Nominate Serhii Ovsianikov to fuel-virtualbox core

Hello, I would like to nominate Serhii Ovsianikov to fuel-virtualbox core due to his significant contribution to the project [1] and [2]. He is the second reviewer and for the last half of the year [2] acts as an unoficial QA in the fuel-virtualbox project. [1]

Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon][OSC][Nova][Neutron] Launch instance with Floating IP

On Thu, 2016-09-08 at 09:34 +1200, Adrian Turjak wrote: > This is exactly what something like Minstral would be fantastic for. > Multi-project workflow. > Rather than try and build logic like this directly into nova, looks > at extending something like Minstral with a basic easy to call task. I

Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon][OSC][Nova][Neutron] Launch instance with Floating IP

Heat is a bit of overkill for something as tiny as this. I was mainly responding to Andrew Laski's comment talking about a service exactly like Minstral, for smaller cross project orchestration of finite tasks. On 8/09/2016 10:12 AM, "Fox, Kevin M" wrote: > > I've typically

Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon][OSC][Nova][Neutron] Launch instance with Floating IP

I've typically used heat to do this too. As it has a nice way out of the box to to undo the actions it does. Thanks, Kevin From: Adrian Turjak [adri...@catalyst.net.nz] Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2016 2:34 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for

Re: [openstack-dev] [poll][kolla] Name of baremetal role/group

Sean, I’d recommend deploy-hosts (I assume this is the bootstrap renamed?) I’d also add a duplicate API of “deploy” and mark deploy as deprecated and follow the standard deprecation policies. I’d recommend making the new OpenStack specific deploy command deploy-openstack Regards -steve

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] moving driver to open source

On 9/7/2016 8:47 AM, John Griffith wrote: On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 9:27 AM, Alon Marx > wrote: I want to share our plans to open the IBM Storage driver source code. Historically we started our way in cinder way back (in Essex if I'm not

Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon][OSC][Nova][Neutron] Launch instance with Floating IP

This is exactly what something like Minstral would be fantastic for. Multi-project workflow. Rather than try and build logic like this directly into nova, looks at extending something like Minstral with a basic easy to call task.

[openstack-dev] [murano] [app-catalog] [ffe] App Catalog dashboards patches are ready

Hi! As the title says here are the patches that set up app-catalog-ui and murano-dashboard to work under common panel structure [1] Repositories would now share a couple of small config files to allow both dashboards be installed independently, if needed [2], [3] Here is also a small script I

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

> -Original Message- > From: Sean McGinnis [mailto:sean.mcgin...@gmx.com] > Sent: September-07-16 3:17 PM > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & > "Release stewards" > > On Wed, Sep 07,

[openstack-dev] [puppet] Puppet 4 related backports

For an ongoing project here at Puppet I needed to validate the stable/mitaka branches against Puppet 4.  I've done that for all three scenarios but doing so required a few backports of items currently in master. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/296557/ https://review.openstack.org/#/c/310794/

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Getting rid of ISO

Congratulations, Vladimir, that's a huge step in a right direction for Fuel. -- Best regards, Oleg Gelbukh On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 6:47 AM, Vladimir Kozhukalov < vkozhuka...@mirantis.com> wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > I'm glad to announce that we have working BVT jobs on Fuel CI that do not >

[openstack-dev] [glance] Newton RC reviews and releases

Hi team, The RC period for a release spans multiple weeks, see Newton schedule here [1]. There are about 4 more weeks in Newton when potential RC releases could take place. The RC1 is bound to happen next week and there will most likely be a RC2 with translations. If there are more critical

[openstack-dev] [glance] Bug days next week

Hi all, I would like to propose bug days for Glance next week Tuesday 13th September and Wednesday 14th September (during your work hours / in your time zone). We've a plenty of bugs to address [1, 2, 3] and looks like the the right time in the cycle when we would get a good benefit of these

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] [telemetry] [requirements] [FFE] Oslo.db 4.13.2

Excerpts from Mike Bayer's message of 2016-09-07 14:09:06 -0400: > > On 09/07/2016 01:29 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > Excerpts from Matthew Thode's message of 2016-09-07 09:11:58 -0500: > >> On 09/07/2016 08:58 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > >>> Excerpts from Matthew Thode's message of 2016-09-07

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 01:07:22PM -0400, Sean Dague wrote: > On 09/07/2016 12:27 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > > Barrett, Carol L wrote: > >> From: Sean Dague [mailto:s...@dague.net] > >>> I think another option would be to run the PTL election early, but just > >>> don't have the turn over

[openstack-dev] [requirements][FFE] Request to allow os-vif 1.2.1 in upper-constraints for newton

This is the FFE to get this change in for newton: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/365165/ The os-vif 1.2.1 release was a bug fix patch release to get a high priority bug [1] in for newton that is impacting the neutron linuxbridge job in the gate [2]. So we already have the release done, we

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2016-09-07 18:24:46 +0200: > Davanum Srinivas wrote: > > Doug, Thierry, > > > > Do we want the stewards to serve as the CPL for Release team as well? > > Yes, they probably would be an evolution of the current release > liaisons. Like I said in the

[openstack-dev] [poll][kolla] Name of baremetal role/group

Hi I recently introduced a new baremetal role/group which is used as part of the kolla-host playbook. https://github.com/openstack/kolla/tree/master/ansible/roles/baremetal This baremetal role is used to install all the dependencies required to deploy kolla containers on a "baremetal" host. The

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 9/7/2016 11:33 AM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: I like this. As someone that has been PTL for multiple cycles, it is incredibly stressful trying to finish the release, start planning for the next one, manage summit planning, etc. I'd love to have someone designated to manage the release-specific

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 16-09-07 02:19 PM, Ian Cordasco wrote: -Original Message- From: Anita Kuno Reply: Anita Kuno Date: September 7, 2016 at 13:08:44 To: Ian Cordasco , OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 9/7/2016 11:35 AM, Ian Cordasco wrote: -Original Message- From: Monty Taylor Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Date: September 7, 2016 at 10:58:52 To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

  -Original Message- From: Anita Kuno Reply: Anita Kuno Date: September 7, 2016 at 13:08:44 To: Ian Cordasco , OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: 

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] [telemetry] [requirements] [FFE] Oslo.db 4.13.2

On 09/07/2016 01:29 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Matthew Thode's message of 2016-09-07 09:11:58 -0500: On 09/07/2016 08:58 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: Excerpts from Matthew Thode's message of 2016-09-07 08:21:50 -0500: https://review.openstack.org/366298 This is just a bump to

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 16-09-07 01:59 PM, Ian Cordasco wrote: -Original Message- From: Anita Kuno Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Date: September 7, 2016 at 12:03:25 To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Add support for tag instances when booting

On 9/7/2016 9:25 AM, Andrew Laski wrote: On Wed, Sep 7, 2016, at 05:15 AM, Zhenyu Zheng wrote: Hi All, Tags for servers are supported in microversion 2.26, but currently we can only add tags to instances that are already existed in the cloud, that is, we can not set tags to instances when

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

  -Original Message- From: Anita Kuno Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Date: September 7, 2016 at 12:03:25 To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject:  Re:

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 2016-09-07 16:20:49 + (+), Barrett, Carol L wrote: [...] > Why not have a PTL own the release from start to finish, with the > PTL for the next release getting elected as above. [...] An overwhelming majority (87%) of our official project teams' deliverables do not follow a synchronous

Re: [openstack-dev] [OSC] Tenant Resource Cleanup

On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 10:19 AM, Dean Troyer wrote: > I created the OSC session Etherpad[0] to start tracking these topic > suggestions. > > [0]https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/osc-otaka-summit > /me sighs loudly I wish I could blame the lack of caffeine, but alas, that URL

Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon][OSC][Nova][Neutron] Launch instance with Floating IP

Right. I use floating ip's because I need the flexibility to have an ip out last the vm its attached to. auto floating ip's are in the "just put this on the network, I don't care what happens when I need to delete my vm" kind of thing. which just having public ip's also could also solve.

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] [telemetry] [requirements] [FFE] Oslo.db 4.13.2

Excerpts from Matthew Thode's message of 2016-09-07 09:11:58 -0500: > On 09/07/2016 08:58 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > Excerpts from Matthew Thode's message of 2016-09-07 08:21:50 -0500: > >> https://review.openstack.org/366298 > >> > >> This is just a bump to upper-constraints so is more minor to

Re: [openstack-dev] [Manila] Choose a new logo

On 09/07/2016 01:20 PM, Ben Swartzlander wrote: For reasons discussed in last week's IRC meeting, we have vacated the previous logo choice and are redoing the vote. http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/vote.pl?id=E_6f0d111cec78c5ef; akey=d34a751f2d084d79

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

Thierry, thanks for writing this up. I think this is a great idea, and something that will help focus the release stewards on a specific release while the PTL can coordinate activities for all aspects of the project. Where appropriate, and where a project decides to take this route, it allows

[openstack-dev] [Neutron] Feature Freeze and Feature Freeze exceptions

Hi folks, We are about a week away from cutting our first release candidate [0]. In preparation for that event, we need to make sure our postmortem [1] and FFE requests are in good order. For those of you have not had the chance of commenting on [1], please go ahead and provide your input.

[openstack-dev] [Manila] Choose a new logo

For reasons discussed in last week's IRC meeting, we have vacated the previous logo choice and are redoing the vote. http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/vote.pl?id=E_6f0d111cec78c5ef; akey=d34a751f2d084d79 This time I'm using the CIVS system because it will allow us to determine a #2 and #3

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 09/07/2016 12:27 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Barrett, Carol L wrote: >> From: Sean Dague [mailto:s...@dague.net] >>> I think another option would be to run the PTL election early, but just >>> don't have the turn over happen until the master release opens up. The >>> current transition

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Ian Cordasco wrote: > One question, should "Release Stewards" also be members of the Stable Team > for that project or will they become members of the Stable Team? It seems > like there should be a relationship there to me (although maybe

Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon][OSC][Nova][Neutron] Launch instance with Floating IP

On 09/07/2016 11:27 AM, Fox, Kevin M wrote: > On the flip side, so is "I want my vm on a private network and I want a > floating ip to attach it to the public network." > > As some clouds don't support it. Yes. I'd categorize the main things possible as: "I want a VM on a public network" "I

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 09/07/2016 11:43 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 12:35 PM, Ian Cordasco wrote: >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: Monty Taylor >> Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 16-09-07 12:43 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 12:35 PM, Ian Cordasco wrote: -Original Message- From: Monty Taylor Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] [telemetry] [requirements] [FFE] Oslo.db 4.13.2

just a heads up, oslo.db 4.13.2 is also broken. we will need this: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/366362/ or something that fixes issue :) On 07/09/16 09:21 AM, Matthew Thode wrote: > https://review.openstack.org/366298 > > This is just a bump to upper-constraints so is more minor to get

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 12:35 PM, Ian Cordasco wrote: > > > -Original Message- > From: Monty Taylor > Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > > Date: September 7, 2016 at

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

  -Original Message- From: Monty Taylor Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Date: September 7, 2016 at 10:58:52 To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: 

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 11:43 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Hi everyone, > > As you probably know by now, starting with the Boston event in 2017, the > Summit will happen further away from the release day and more around the > middle of the next development cycle. You can find

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 16-09-07 12:20 PM, Barrett, Carol L wrote: -Original Message- From: Sean Dague [mailto:s...@dague.net] Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2016 9:05 AM To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards" On

Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon][OSC][Nova][Neutron] Launch instance with Floating IP

On the flip side, so is "I want my vm on a private network and I want a floating ip to attach it to the public network." As some clouds don't support it. Thanks, Kevin From: Monty Taylor [mord...@inaugust.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2016 8:55 AM

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

Barrett, Carol L wrote: > From: Sean Dague [mailto:s...@dague.net] >> I think another option would be to run the PTL election early, but just >> don't have the turn over happen until the master release opens up. The >> current transition period is > > > >> actually quite short as noted by the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

Davanum Srinivas wrote: > Doug, Thierry, > > Do we want the stewards to serve as the CPL for Release team as well? Yes, they probably would be an evolution of the current release liaisons. Like I said in the email, "a sort of per-cycle release liaison on steroids". -- Thierry Carrez (ttx)

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

-Original Message- From: Sean Dague [mailto:s...@dague.net] Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2016 9:05 AM To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards" On 09/07/2016 11:43 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Hi

Re: [openstack-dev] [third-party] [puppet] [infra] puppet-jenkins doesn't allow to pin version

Adding [infra]. Simon proposed a patch to make it work. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/366803/1 -Original Message- From: Evgeny Antyshev [mailto:eantys...@virtuozzo.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2016 2:22 AM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 09/07/2016 11:43 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Hi everyone, > > As you probably know by now, starting with the Boston event in 2017, the > Summit will happen further away from the release day and more around the > middle of the next development cycle. You can find more info on the > rationale

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

Doug, Thierry, Do we want the stewards to serve as the CPL for Release team as well? -- Dims [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/CrossProjectLiaisons#Release_management On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 09/07/2016 10:43 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Hi everyone, > > As you probably know by now, starting with the Boston event in 2017, the > Summit will happen further away from the release day and more around the > middle of the next development cycle. You can find more info on the > rationale

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2016-09-07 17:43:59 +0200: > Hi everyone, > > As you probably know by now, starting with the Boston event in 2017, the > Summit will happen further away from the release day and more around the > middle of the next development cycle. You can find more

Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon][OSC][Nova][Neutron] Launch instance with Floating IP

On 09/07/2016 03:31 AM, Martin Millnert wrote: > Hi Matt, > > On Tue, 2016-09-06 at 16:39 -0500, Matt Riedemann wrote: >> Floating IPs aren't required in OpenStack deployments, and anyone >> running with cells v1 (Rackspace, GoDaddy, NeCTAR, CERN) doesn't use >> or >> support them, at least

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Next steps for resource providers work

On 09/07/2016 06:46 AM, Chris Dent wrote: > > More updates on resource providers work: > > Yesterday we realized that a SQL join for associating inventories > with allocations and resource providers was missing a critical and > clause. This was leading to allocations failing to be written when >

[openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

Hi everyone, As you probably know by now, starting with the Boston event in 2017, the Summit will happen further away from the release day and more around the middle of the next development cycle. You can find more info on the rationale for that at [1] and [2] if interested, this is not the topic

[openstack-dev] [ironic] Future of cleaning when in maintenance mode

Hi all! Today while playing with my installation I noticed that we do try to run cleaning for nodes in maintenance mode. This leads to a somewhat confusing result, because we no-op heartbeats for such nodes. So cleaning gets stuck in "clean wait" forever [1]. However, it seems like some

Re: [openstack-dev] [OSC] Tenant Resource Cleanup

On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 9:48 AM, Steve Martinelli wrote: > There's been a bug filed against OSC to implement ospurge for cleaning up > resources in (compute, network, storage, image and identity) [1] for a > while now. As Jordan said, this is something we want to be

Re: [openstack-dev] [release] proposing adding Tony Breeds to "Release Managers" team

On Tue, Sep 06, 2016 at 07:37:55PM -0400, Emilien Macchi wrote: > My vote doesn't count but I still have feedback to share. > > As a PTL I have to release multiple projects and Tony was always very > helpful and responsive in the reviews. > I would be super happy to have him part of release

Re: [openstack-dev] [OSC] Tenant Resource Cleanup

There's been a bug filed against OSC to implement ospurge for cleaning up resources in (compute, network, storage, image and identity) [1] for a while now. As Jordan said, this is something we want to be modular, and pluggable, so other OSC plugins could extend this clean up command. [1]

Re: [openstack-dev] [OSC] Tenant Resource Cleanup

On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 4:18 PM, Boris Bobrov wrote: > Hello, > > I wonder if it would be worth integrating ospurge into openstackclient. > > Are there any osc sessions planned at the summit? > > > Hi, I am the current "PTL" of the openstack/ospurge project. The project is

Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon][OSC][Nova][Neutron] Launch instance with Floating IP

On Wed, Sep 7, 2016, at 04:31 AM, Martin Millnert wrote: > Hi Matt, > > On Tue, 2016-09-06 at 16:39 -0500, Matt Riedemann wrote: > > Floating IPs aren't required in OpenStack deployments, and anyone  > > running with cells v1 (Rackspace, GoDaddy, NeCTAR, CERN) doesn't use > > or  > > support

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Add support for tag instances when booting

On Wed, Sep 7, 2016, at 05:15 AM, Zhenyu Zheng wrote: > Hi All, > > Tags for servers are supported in microversion 2.26, but currently we > can only add tags to > instances that are already existed in the cloud, that is, we can not > set tags to instances > when we boot the instances. User will

[openstack-dev] [TripleO] Mistral transition status for RC1

Hey, This is just a quick update on the Mistral API transition. We are now at a point where all the major CLI commands (node registration, introspection and deployment) are being powered by mistral workflows. We have an etherpad that is tracking all the reviews in quite a bit of detail:

Re: [openstack-dev] [OSC] Tenant Resource Cleanup

Hello, I wonder if it would be worth integrating ospurge into openstackclient. Are there any osc sessions planned at the summit? On 09/07/2016 04:05 PM, John Davidge wrote: Hello, During the Mitaka cycle we merged a new feature into the python-neutronclient called ’neutron purge’. This

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements][FFE] global-requirements update to positional to 1.1.1

On Wed, 7 Sep 2016 at 14:30 Ian Cordasco wrote: [...] > https://review.openstack.org/366631 > > > > The combination of oslo.context 2.9.0 + positional 1.0.1 (which is the > > current minimum requirement) results in various unit test failures in > > barbican, related to

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] [telemetry] [requirements] [FFE] Oslo.db 4.13.2

On 09/07/2016 08:58 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Matthew Thode's message of 2016-09-07 08:21:50 -0500: >> https://review.openstack.org/366298 >> >> This is just a bump to upper-constraints so is more minor to get testing >> working and fix the bug that occurred in Gnocchi (and possibly

Re: [openstack-dev] [OSC] Tenant Resource Cleanup

On 07 Sep 2016, at 15:05, John Davidge > wrote: Hello, During the Mitaka cycle we merged a new feature into the python-neutronclient called ’neutron purge’. This enables a simple CLI command that deletes all of the neutron

Re: [openstack-dev] [OSC] Tenant Resource Cleanup

On 07 Sep 2016, at 15:05, John Davidge > wrote: Hello, During the Mitaka cycle we merged a new feature into the python-neutronclient called ’neutron purge’. This enables a simple CLI command that deletes all of the neutron

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] [telemetry] [requirements] [FFE] Oslo.db 4.13.2

Excerpts from Matthew Thode's message of 2016-09-07 08:21:50 -0500: > https://review.openstack.org/366298 > > This is just a bump to upper-constraints so is more minor to get testing > working and fix the bug that occurred in Gnocchi (and possibly others). > > We are able to mask the 'bad'

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo.context][requirements][ffe] newton - positional 1.1.1 minimum requirement

Hey James! There's already a discussion about this with the [requirements] and [ffe] tags by Matthew Thode. Could we centralize the discussion on that thread please? Thanks, Ian -Original Message- From: James Page Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo.context][requirements][ffe] newton - positional 1.1.1 minimum requirement

On Wed, 7 Sep 2016 at 14:51 Ian Cordasco wrote: > Hey James! > > There's already a discussion about this with the [requirements] and > [ffe] tags by Matthew Thode. Could we centralize the discussion on > that thread please? > Of course - missed that whilst eating lunch!

[openstack-dev] [Ironic] QA Meeting cancelled today

To focus on the Newton work. The Ironic QA meeting is cancelled for today. Thanks, John __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe:

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] moving driver to open source

On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 9:27 AM, Alon Marx wrote: > I want to share our plans to open the IBM Storage driver source code. > Historically we started our way in cinder way back (in Essex if I'm not > mistaken) ​You're mistaken, Cinder didn't exist at that time... but it's

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Getting rid of ISO

Dear colleagues, I'm glad to announce that we have working BVT jobs on Fuel CI that do not use ISO but instead deploy Fuel admin node from packages onto vanilla Centos 7. Please take a look at [1]. There are jobs '10.0.repos.*' [2], [3], [4]. We continue to work on re-implementing review jobs

Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla] Need clarify about baremetal host group and role in Ansible

> -Original Message- > From: duon...@vn.fujitsu.com [mailto:duon...@vn.fujitsu.com] > Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2016 5:42 AM > To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org > Subject: [openstack-dev] [kolla] Need clarify about baremetal host > group and role in Ansible > > Hi all,

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] moving driver to open source

On 09/06/2016 05:27 PM, Alon Marx wrote: > I want to share our plans to open the IBM Storage driver source code. > Historically we started our way in cinder way back (in Essex if I'm > not mistaken) with just a small piece of code in the community while > keeping most of the driver code closed.

Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] Testing optional composable services in the CI

On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 9:18 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote: > On 09/01/2016 05:48 PM, Emilien Macchi wrote: >> >> On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 9:16 AM, Steven Hardy wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 07:20:59AM -0400, James Slagle wrote: On Wed, Aug 17,

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements][FFE] global-requirements update to positional to 1.1.1

-Original Message- From: Matthew Thode Reply: prometheanf...@gentoo.org , OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Date: September 7, 2016 at 08:12:15 To: OpenStack Development

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] [telemetry] [requirements] [FFE] Oslo.db 4.13.2

https://review.openstack.org/366298 This is just a bump to upper-constraints so is more minor to get testing working and fix the bug that occurred in Gnocchi (and possibly others). We are able to mask the 'bad' versions of oslo.db and unmask pymysql 0.7.7 after the freeze (and backport them to

  1   2   >